Stephen Lynch is a regressive Democrat. He’s been a Bush-Cheney booster on Iraq; he’s toed the Republican line on many social issues; he hasn’t exactly been burning up the halls of Congress with his blazing accomplishments since he was elected; and he earned a spot in BMG’s chicken coop for his incredibly lame failure to debate Phil Dunkelbarger in the primary. (He did, by the way, debate Jack Robinson — there’s an excerpt of a press writeup here).
Now, with three days to go ’til the election, Lynch has finally managed to get his campaign website up and running. But no sooner did he do that than he splashed the tired, and thoroughly discredited, canard that Al Gore claims he invented the internet on his home page. Dork.
We thoroughly enjoyed our conversation with Jack E. Robinson; we’re pleased that he’s been actively participating at BMG; and he made a good case for why we and other Democrats should endorse him.
But we can’t. And the reason is the obvious one: control of Congress hangs in the balance. Any vote for a Republican in Congress is a vote to keep Denny “Foley? Foley who?” Hastert and John “It’s not ‘boner,’ God damn it!” Boehner running the show; to keep James Sensenbrenner running the Judiciary Committee; to keep Duncan Hunter running the Armed Services Committee; and to keep any number of other odious Republicans hanging on to way more power than any sane world would ever have given them.
Control of Congress is more important to the future of this country than is our Governor’s race — obsessed though we’ve been with the latter. And the Democrats have a real chance to take over both chambers of Congress on Tuesday. In that environment, we cannot recommend a vote for a Republican simply because we wish Stephen Lynch were a better Democrat.
We could make an exception if Robinson were to pledge that, despite his party affiliation, he would caucus with Democrats, and would vote for Democratic leadership. But he wasn’t willing to do that, and it’s easy to understand why — if he did, he would be the congressional equivalent of a man without a country, reviled by Republicans and tolerated but probably not welcomed by Democrats. Not a great place to be. We don’t doubt that a Representative Robinson would, as he says, be part of the 30-or-so-member group of “moderate” Republicans, which he hopes will have a good deal of sway in what he predicts will continue to be a narrowly Republican-controlled House. But that’s just too many contingencies. We hope and expect that the Democrats will take the House, and we want the margin to be as big as possible.
We leave the voters of the 9th District to the dictates of their individual consciences.
Rightly Said!!!
I agree with the criticism of Lynch, the moderate praises of Robinson (Especially him spending time here!), and the lack of an endorsement in the end.
<
p>
You guys got this one exactly right. Nice job.
I can’t imagine voting for either one of them. Might write in Dunkelberger again…
I can’t vote for a Republican and I can’t vote for Stephen Lynch anymore.
I reccomend a write-in for State Representative Marty Walsh of Dorchester.
Well gents, I certainly tried! However, I’m more than willing to take a “non-endorsement” as an “endorsement in principle” – and hope that 9th District BMG voters act accordingly.
<
p>I also have greatly enjoyed my participation in the enemy camp – the editors and members have made me feel as welcome as any Dem.
<
p>Although virtually all prognostications call for a Dem-controlled House, I’m still sticking with my prediction of a 1 or 2-seat GOP majority – of which I fully expect to be a part.
<
p>I’ll post 9th Congressional District results here as soon as we know them Tuesday evening.
though on many occasions I’ve passionately stated exactly what the Editors said in this post, that the balance of the House is more important than voting against Lynch; thank you for running and bringing competition to the seat, because it’s important, and for coming here and participating. That says volumes.
<
p>
That said, I think you should join a party that seems to better reflect your views than the one you’re in. đŸ™‚
You’ve got to really dislike Steven Lynch to even consider voting for Jackie E. If I lived in the 9th, I just wouldn’t vote for either… maybe I’d write in someone? Lynch is a disgrace.
I am a lifelong Democrat, 5th generation, from Walpole and actually live in the 9th Congressional District. I attended the debate to see the candidateÂ’s positions.
<
p>
Jack E used it as an infomercial not addressing the questions posed by the moderator, repeatedly interrupting and demanding rebuttal time. The moderator lost control of the debate for a time and he was impolite and not respectful.
<
p>
He spewed his brand of Republican negativism any tried to pacify the crowd by telling them he would not support the Republican majority when it remains after the election. Indicating he would caucus with 30 other Republicans, like that would actually give him any leverage.
<
p>
Robinson reminds me of one of the Keebler gnomes moving from tree to tree in search of an elected position.
<
p>
Lynch is a lunch pail Democrat that has lived in the district all of his life and understands the needs of the district and Mass.
<
p>
The editors of BMG may think he is “off the farm” because he does not support their agenda but to lean towards Robinson, a Republican, in unfathomable.
<
p>
From my perspective Lynch has served the 9th well and deserves to be reelected.
The only people who were impolite or disrespectful at the debate were Lynch’s 100 or so union sign-holders and “supporters” – who clapped after every Lynch answer (after being warned numerous times by the moderator not to do so), and heckled and groaned after every one of my responses.
<
p>I have never been impolite or disrespectful at any time in my political (or personal or professional career). So Skipper should disclose that he’s probably a Lynch coat-holder.
<
p>BTW, all 100 or so of Lynch’s union “supporters” at the debate were actually being paid by their union. How do we know? Because a couple of union business agents were going around having all of their guys “sign in” so they could get paid (they even approached my organizer thinking he was a union guy).
<
p>By paying their members to appear at the debate, the unions violated federal campaign finance laws because unions cannot make “in-kind” contributions to federal candidates. If there was more time, I would file a formal complaint with the FEC – I still might do so (win or lose).
<
p>Also, when the debate ended around 9:30 p.m., the only people left outside were my loyal band of a dozen supporters. All of Lynch’s union “supporters” had long since “left the building” with Elvis once their timecards had been punched!
My Congressmen is a real Democrat (Mike Capuano!) and I have no need to worry about him not fighting for progressive causes. That said If I lived next door in the 9th it would be a very tough call, Robinson is a very articulate, moderate, sensible Republican, and the BMG argument regarding control of the House is slightly absurd since Robinson has no realistic shot at winning and the Republicans will lose even by conservative estimates 15-20 seats in the least nationwide, a loss that the 9th going one way or the other wont significantly affect.
<
p>
So its a tough call, but it comes down to incumbent performance and sending your incumbent a good message that he was wrong on the issues. Voting for Dunklebar does that, a concerted organized write in effort for Dunklebar would have done that assuming all his primary voters wrote him in, but seeing that Dunklebar did lose and no organized write in effort exists the only way to raise a significant percentage of opposition to make the race close is through a vote for Robinson.